In the afterglow of victory in the Gulf War, a number of confident assertions
were made about the military stature of the United States in the world. A popular
one is that the United States now remains "the only superpower." This verdict
reflects not only the demonstration of strength in Desert Storm, but also the
perception of the economic and political difficulties afflicting the Russian Federation. The latter's status as a "former superpower" seemed confirmed by its
essentially passive stance in the Gulf crisis.

Whether or not the verdict is premature, it begs a definition of "superpower."
Basically, that term has been used in the past four decades to denote military
power with two credentials: (1) massiveness and (2) effective global reach. In
the popular mind, the term has been associated primarily with nuclear weapons
and the means of their delivery. The Gulf War, however, is a reminder that
much more complex factors are at work. Indeed, only by looking back to what
is now alluded to as the "Cold War era" can we gain a clearer understanding
of the military posture and strategy of the United States as they have evolved
over the past four decades, and of the newly emerging challenges to that posture
and strategy.

The Soviet Union emerged from World War II as the dominant power in
Eurasia--the region the geopolitical thinker Halford MacKinder designated as
the "heartland" of global power competition. Although weakened by the conflict, the Soviet Union, under Joseph Stalin, stood poised to exploit its geopolitical
position toward the conquest of, or at least hegemonic sway over, the Eurasian
landmass as a whole, particularly the rich industrial prize represented by Western
Europe. In pursuit of this goal, the Soviet Union could look not only to the

Print this page

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary
to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution.
We are sorry for any inconvenience.